Someone at Gallup is getting fired

For approaching the truth.

In a few media outlets, the latest Gallup poll on weapons bans is getting traction.

Poll: Majority of Americans Oppose ‘Assault Rifles’ Ban
A Gallup poll released October 19 shows that a majority of Americans oppose passing a ban on “assault rifles.”

According to the poll, 40 percent of Americans support such a ban but 57 percent oppose it. Gallup notes that the 40 percent “support for an assault rifles ban is below the historical average of 47%.”

The numbers are news because they invert years of alleged surveys which indicated massive support for such a ban. For instance:

And yet, here we are in October 2018:

Gallup: In U.S., Support for Assault Weapons Ban at Record Low
In Gallup’s 2016 Crime poll, conducted Oct. 5-9, opposition now exceeds support by 25 percentage points, 61% to 36%.

“Damn it, Swift! Any time the numbers are pro-RKBA, you’re supposed to flip the chart over before releasing it.”

This may be the closest-to-honest poll released by Gallup in years, if not decades. I never believed the previous counter-polls because they never approached the reality expressed in actual popular votes, referendums and initiatives. This new Gallup poll comes closer to matching real-world voting by the people.

People “vote” in other ways, as well. Earlier this year, California reclassified crippled “bullet-button” rifles as “assault weapons” and required they be registered. It’s been estimated that only three percent (3%) were actually registered.

One might expect that registration compliance rate to be a little higher if even 36% percent of folks think they should be banned.

Gallup seems to have stumpled up, and accidentally released, the partial truth of majority opposition to confiscation schemes. But they still haven’t grasped the magnitude of opposition.

Three percent. Compliance. Consider that California laws essentially required every lawful gun owner to be licensed (thus registered), and all firearms sales to be recorded. 97% of registered owners with registered suddenly-assault-weapons blew them off this year. In California.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)


Ed. note: This commentary appeared first in TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Claire McCaskill vs Veritas, Truth

With Demoncrats doing everything to gain control of the nation so they can institute their program of higher taxes, impeaching a lawfully elected President and enacting gun control they have a variety of strategies they are flinging at the goal.

Since San Fran Nan has decided it’s more important to enact gun and citizen control than to win elections, I thought we might take a look at some of these brand new demoncratic socialist candidates. Although really, I guess if you’re a Demoncratic Socialist, after you’ve enacted gun and citizen control, you don’t really need to worry about winning elections, yeh? They’re just being more open about it now.

One is the socialist who thinks Bernie Sanders is the Great Pumpkin, Ocasio-Cortez.

Ocasio-Cortez’s Great Bernie Pumpkin

 

 

 

 

Another is a candidate in Texas who wants to lead the nation in gun control, has a perfectly WASP sounding name so apparently wants to be called Beta, oh, sorry! Not Beta? Oh, right Beto. So Beto is desirous of stripping Americans on one of their Constitutionally enumerated rights. Not granted. I’ve also heard he eats his tacos with a fork, so does Beto use the same fork to eat his tacos he uses to shred our Constitution?

Sometimes I wondered if the National Demoncratic Socialist Party realizes these elections are to be held in America, but in this day an age? Ocasio-Cortez beat a sitting legislator, so yeah, I guess they do.

Then there is Missouri. Missouri has Air-Claire McCaskill.

I’ll be right up front here, this really isn’t a “Gee Josh Hawley is a great guy, how could you pass him up” column. For one, I don’t like Josh Hawley, I think he is a smarmy, greasy, snake oil selling jerk. Missouri elected a Governor, we’ll call him Eric Greitens, shall we? Gov Eric did something quite foolish in his personal life before he ever ran for Governor. And like politicians all over, of every party, he got caught. Now, he didn’t drown her so he didn’t actually follow a recognized approved DSNC playbook and perhaps that is why the Demoncratic Socialists became convinced the world would end, end I say, if our Gov Greitens wasn’t removed from office. Well, it could have been the lack of playbook or it could have been that he signed a bill to allow Missouri to become a right to work state. The Demoncratic Socialists didn’t like that either. But the AG at the time was Josh Hawley. I don’t know if Hawley was just trying to prove how cool and unbiased he is but he felt compelled to wade into the poop patch created by Demoncrats and their propaganda arm, the mainstream media. Now the thing is, there are some actually very curious things about the persecution of Gov Greitens by good little Demoncratic Socialist Kim Gardner that SCREAM for someone such as a real attorney general to poke a nose in. Lt Col Dave Grossman did a couple of articles for The Federalist asking questions the media or the AG didn’t seem to be asking. The first one asked questions like,

1. Where is the police report?

2. Where is the evidence?

3. Why did the FBI, the U.S. Attorney, and the police refuse to look into this case?

4. What’s the deal with the private investigators?

5. Why did the prosecution want so badly to delay the trial until the fall?

That number 4? Now that is some interesting reading.

The Second article, had such data that one would really think someone would be asking about her expenditure of taxpayer funds,

1. It appears that Gardner began preparing the paperwork for the indictment prior to conducting any investigation.

2. Gardner allegedly broke the law in the course of her prosecution.

3. Gardner’s assistant prosecutor allegedly misled the grand jury about the indictment.

4. Gardner’s investigators were under FBI investigation.

5. Even the chief of police of St. Louis is demanding answers.

But, guess not. So no, I’m really not so much a Hawley fan. When you consider that this grave threat to freedom, Mom, the flag and apple pie just pretty much faded away after Gov Eric resigned…seems odd. Still don’t have Right to Work.

So, when I say this is about the Demoncratic Socialist known as Air Claire McCaskill, please don’t think this is about saying Hawley is great, it’s not. It’s that Air Claire is so much worse, and dirtier than Josh Hawley. Let’s take a few trips down memory lane, shall we? Because Air Claire has a lot of history that can be examined, along with her baggage, carry-on and otherwise.

But I’m saving the cherry of memory lane for last.

Air-Claire likes to create problems so she can use the force of government to solve them, like all big government Demoncratic Socialists do. For example in February of this year, Air Claire got all hot and bothered to battle “Identity theft” and the use of stolen social security numbers! Especially the use of stolen children’s social security numbers! Good job Air-Claire, right?? I mean who wouldn’t want Air-Claire in her crusader cape flying the friendly skies on behalf of law abiding citizens?

How about law-abiding citizens who are pissed because Air-Claire helped create the problem she is now crusading against? Oh, YES, she did.

Air-Claire helped create the problem, now she expects private businesses to spend their money to fix it, after she blithely spent OUR money to create it. How so?

It would be appropriate to have [Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals – DACA] applicants disclose any misuse of Social Security numbers or other personal identifiers so that the system can be purged and corrected, and so that the true number holders can be informed. It would also be appropriate to impose an additional fine on the many DACA recipients who worked illegally before obtaining DACA status and improperly used false identity information. The fines could be used to establish a restitution fund for the victims.

… 43.9 percent of all surveyed DACA recipients had worked prior to gaining DACA status, and that percentage increases to 60.7 percent for DACA recipients over 25 years of age. However, these individuals were unable to legally obtain Social Security numbers for their pre-DACA employment, which means that they used fraudulently obtained Social Security numbers that all-too-often belong to American citizens, including American children.

The use of unlawfully obtained Social Security numbers by individuals eligible for DACA status is so pervasive that the Obama administration instructed applicants not to disclose their illegally obtained numbers. That ensured that Americans who are the victims of DACA identity theft were left with destroyed credit, arrest records attached to their names, unpaid tax liabilities, and corrupted medical records while the DACA recipients walked away scot-free from multiple felonies.

Does Air-Claire have anything to do with that mess? Does a Demoncratic Socialist love vote fraud?

She supports chain migration, sanctuary cities, funding for executive amnesty, and funding for processing centers for Central American unaccompanied minors. She voted for the DREAM Act, against a bill to prevent suing Arizona for immigration law, and against defunding sanctuary cities.

Something to remember with another 5,000 Hondurans headed this way with at least 100 members of ISIS chumming along for the ride and free drinks.

So is using taxpayer dollars to create a problem, then expecting private businesses or taxpayers to spend their money to fix her cockwomble (I love Katie Hopkins don’t you?) normal? Yeah, pretty much.

Aiming to Crack Down on Exorbitant Air Ambulance Costs for Missourians, McCaskill Introduces Legislation

AAMS Responds to Sen. McCaskill’s Air Ambulance Consumer Protection Act

The Association of Air Medical Services (AAMS) is greatly concerned about the unintended negative consequences that can result from the recent Air Ambulance Consumer Protection Act, reported to be introduced today by Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO). While it is the position of AAMS that all our members advocate on behalf of their patients and work toward solutions that keep patients out of the middle in negotiations with insurers, this legislation doesn’t do that – it only provides insurers with smaller portions of patient’s bills to cover while erecting “borders in the sky” making it difficult or impossible to transport patients across state lines. We can do better – we can require transparency, fix Medicare, and solve for greater healthcare access.

Transporting patients across state lines was something aero-medical helicopters routinely did when I flew. It’s like Air-Claire just hasn’t yet ruined enough healthcare systems to suit herself.

And it’s kind of ironic that Air-Claire thinks she should chime in on air anything really.

The appellation “Air-Claire”, where does that come from? Claire McCaskill and her husband Joseph Shepherd are very wealthy, in fact, she’s one of the wealthiest members of congress. Businesses linked to McCaskill’s husband get $131 million in federal dollars

McCaskill is one of the wealthiest members of Congress, a fact that Republicans are quick to remind voters as McCaskill battles for a third Senate term representing a state President Donald Trump won by nearly 19 percentage points in 2016. GOP-funded ads trying to paint her as out of touch with ordinary Missourians have attacked McCaskill for buying a $2.7 million D.C. condo and for using her husband’s private plane on the campaign trail.

So a few years ago, air-Claire got busted using the family’s private jet to travel around and campaign. And billing the taxpayers for it.

It gets worse for Air Claire. The public realized (even the press) that using taxpayer dollars to pay yourself is wrong. The pressure was unbearable and McCaskill whipped out her personal checkbook and re-paid the federal treasury with an $88,000 check. It’s shameful when you game the system to the point of being politically forced to pay back a taxpayer subsidy.

Oh but wait, there’s more as they say on TV. Air Claire, the high tax and spend obama Demoncratic Socialist wouldn’t do anything shady with taxes would she?

McCaskill had been keeping the plane in Delaware and Illinois, two states that do not impose personal property taxes. Well, Missouri does. So, was McCaskill, a committed liberal millionaire who advocates soaking the rich, actually dodging taxes?

Yes, Air Claire was trying to pay fewer taxes. Caught again and pressured by the public, McCaskill pulled out her checkbook and wrote a check for over $300,000 for back taxes on the plane.

Not only was McCaskill paying her own company taxpayer dollars to fund her travels, she avoided paying taxes to the state she supposedly serves.

There’s a few more things in the article linked above. Here’s another one from 2011, Breaking: Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., Failed to Pay $287,000 in Property Taxes on Aircraft

But like any elitist, she think the basket of deplorables is just behaving badly, lots of normal people have 3 million dollar private planes!

Wait, what? Air Claire had her husband sell “the damn plane”. They waited a little while and bought another one.

Now what is funny, is Air Claire has been doing the Hillary Clintoon Scooby van deal. Hers is called BigBlue. Wow, really Air Claire? Big Blue, well ok.

So Air Claire is being all folksy with her RV tour

The RV, named BigBlue by the campaign, was unveiled late last month by McCaskill, who said she was “very excited to hit the road” in it for an upcoming “Veterans for Claire” tour. The campaign kept a live blog of its three-day RV trip from May 29 to May 31, posting updates of its whereabouts.

All indications from the McCaskill campaign were that she was traveling on the RV. The campaign bragged after the three-day tour concluded that it had traveled 700 miles on the RV. The campaign asked in fundraising emails for money to fuel the RV, complaining, “gas is expensive.”

“It costs us $200 just to fill up the RV and with the number of places we plan on going—that adds up fast,” the campaign wrote, without mentioning aircraft fuel costs. “Will you pitch in just $5 today to help fund our RV tour and power us to a victory in November?”

Now for the fun part?? Air Claire has been FLYING a bunch of that in her private plane, and just not telling anyone or at least so far as we know, charging the taxpayers for the use of the plane. The same article listed above tells how the plane has been tracked and it’s path lining up with her RV. Yeah. Worth reading that. But Air Claire knew they would probably track the plane, so she had

Claire McCaskill Took Action to Hide Travel on Private Plane From Public

Email records show FAA was asked to hide tracking data of Democratic senator’s plane in April

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D., Mo.) took action earlier this year to make her family’s private plane untrackable by the public, according to documents obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration.

Didn’t work.

Which has led to some kind of fun things like the NRSC trolling Air Claire at campaign stops by having airport ground crew there for BigBlue like photo bombing gnomes, it’s kind of cute really.

But the Washington Free Beacon did the best coverage of it.

There is even a Air Claire computer game you can play for free, http://www.flyairclaire.com/

But now, now James O’Keefe with Project Veritas comes bringing us the real Air Claire, and she is every bit as dirty as you should be understanding from everything you’ve just read. Claire is a liar, flat out. Here is the Project Veritas video, and it is well, well worth watching. People just can’t know that.

Then KOLR10 allowed Air Claire to express her outrage at Josh Hawley. Huh? He had nothing to do with it. Air Claire had a synapse or two go missing. So rather than watch Claire’s idiotic response, let’s watch the brilliant and talented Mr. O’Keefe dismantle it.

Now at 1:17 in, James seems shocked that Air Claire would just say something on TV, that is just a flat out lie. Just say it, just throw it out there with no truth behind it. Darling James, WHY?? It’s not like it’s the first time Air Claire has done this. From 20th June 2012,

And, we’ll let Glen Beck take it away

But now, now, the cherry. Just step into my wayback machine. And I do mean way back. Back to when Air Claire was the Prosecutor for Jackson County Missouri, on 9th December 1992.

From page 81 of the most excellent book, Missouri Weapons and Self-Defense Law: Commom Law Experience and Missouri Practice

McCaskill has been lying about gun laws even in 1992 as a prosecutor

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, Air Claire is the prosecutor. I’m almost sure back in 1992 James O’Keefe and Josh Hawley had nothing to do with her lying to the press about the law that she certainly should have known better as a prosecutor. But if you really fear that they might have secretly been taping what she openly lied about I can ask the author.

You see, that is the thing, Air Claire openly lies, in any way shape or form she feels the need to get what she wants. She will deceive and hurt whoever necessary, because Air Claire is evil. You may or not give two hoots about the Second Amendment, but I promise you, there is most likely an issue that you care very deeply about. And you think you know Air Claire’s position on it. But she has lied to and betrayed Second Amendment people for years, you think she won’t betray you? You are being foolish.

Air Claire is only one of the Demoncratic Socialists up for election this time. Nancy Pelosi has said if they win, gun control takes priority over winning elections. And, as I suspect will be the case it will be because the fight will have changed from the soft fight to the hard fight. Because there are something that they just can not do to us while we can fight back. Whether or not you believe in the electoral system or think it’s all bunkem, I think it it worth it to suit up and show up and participate in the legal option, at least as long as we have it. Besides, you can always join Bear in his new game.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Anti-Gun Voter Intimidation Initiative

The Brady Campaign to Protect Violent Criminals, along with a hodgepodge of Democrat and left-wing groups, appears to be conspiring to intimidate voters.

Campaign to ‘protect voters’ asks for help in keeping guns out of polling places
Gun-control groups are launching a “voter protection campaign” to keep guns out of the polling booths this Election Day.

The social media campaign is encouraging voters who see people with firearms to text “Guns down” to 91990. Reports will be sent to nonpartisan election protection experts, who may contact authorities or send a lawyer to the polling place.

Nonpartisan my rear end.

The campaign targets key districts that have competitive races and high number of gun-owning households in Florida, Texas, Indiana, Nevada, Wisconsin, Colorado and Georgia.

You get that? Races where Republicans and Democrats are running neck and neck… which also have a lot of gun owners. Why is that important?

Gun owners tend strongly to be anything but Democrat. Independent or Republican. These Dem tools are putting together a network of anonymous snitches to report — and prevent voting by — suspected gun owners non-Democrat voters, thus tipping tight races to Dems.

Anti-gun Dems, like Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, who admits to expecting noncitizens to vote for her.

The partisan voter intimidation isn’t obvious enough yet? Only six states specifically ban firearms from polling places: Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana and Texas. In more than half the states they say they will specifically target, CCW at the polls is legal (other laws might come into play, if polling places are in schools, for instance).

They’re targeting lawful activities of probable opposition voters.

They’re conspiring to suppress opposition votes. That happens to be a federal crime: 18 U.S. Code § 241 – Conspiracy against rights.

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same;
[…]
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

The civil penalties under 42 U.S. Code § 1983 – Civil action for deprivation of rights can be rather impressive as well.

I happen to be a lawful gun owner. I have a GWL (CCW). I generally carry every day.

I also happen to live in one of the states on which they are focusing.

Note that I said “lawful.” I am aware of my state’s restriction on firearms at polling places. I comply (unhappily, but I comply). I dislike leaving my defensive tools in an unattended vehicle, so when I vote — and I do — I leave my sidearm at home. I go straight to the polling station, vote, and go right back home, where my Second Amendment human/civil rights are back in effect.

I will go to vote on November 6. I will comply with the law. But my apparel will make it clear that I am a gun owner (without falling afoul of political speech restrictions). I’ll even try to look like I’m voting Republican.

And if one of these voter intimidating snitches fingers me, I’ll simply exclaim, “Jackpot!”

Which will be nice, as I hardly expect to win the Mega Millions prize.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

9th Circuit is in a crack this time

Well done, Calguns Foundation, Second Amendment Foundation, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, and Madison Society Foundation.

Riverside, California Sheriff Stan Sniff Sued for “Discriminatory and Unconstitutional” Handgun Carry Policies in Federal Court
After purchasing a handgun with the intention of eventually lawfully carrying it for self-defense, plaintiff Arie van Nieuwenhuyzen asked the Riverside County Sherriff’s Department how he could apply for a “CCW” license to carry it in public. But the Sheriff’s Department told him that, because he was a legal U.S. resident and not a U.S. citizen, he could not even apply for a license under Sheriff Sniff’s handgun policies and practices. That, the plaintiffs say, is unconstitutional.

Here is the Complaint. Good reading.

As I said, the 9th is in a tough spot of their own making.

Historically, 9th Circuit Courts have done their damnedest to uphold almost every California infringement of Second Amendment rights, going so far as to support a law requiring nonexistent “microstamping”.

On the other hand, a 9th Circuit Appellate panel did recently rule in favor of open carry. And that’s a precedent that may apply here, since California doesn’t allow any unlicensed carry.

What really gets interesting is that van Nieuwenhuyzen is challenging a blanket policy, one which appears to be in violation of California state preemption laws.

Sniff’s department, rather stupidly, did not reject van Nieuwenhuyzen’s application on the usual (and bogus) “good moral character” grounds. They refused his application because he isn’t a citizen. That was a mistake.

While I’m sure most judges in the 9th would like to uphold that policy (and often rule in favor of the state versus any sane reality), Sniff et al screwed up.

To find for the sheriff, the judge would have to find that the policy of a blanket ban on noncitizen legal residents — regardless of “good moral character,” community standing, whatever — is in the interest of “public safety.”

That noncitizen legal residents are an inherent threat to public safety. Simply by existing.

I almost hope the judge (and the 9th Appeals Court) is that stupid. If legal residents are an inherent threat, just imagine what a threat illegal aliens must be.

That would provide a precedent to challenge every “sanctuary” policy for illegal aliens out there. You know, the illegal aliens that Democrats expect to be voting for gun control in the mid-terms.

Or the judge (and Circuit) could opt for sanity, and we still chip a –admittedly small — hole in arbitrary CCW denials.

Win/Win.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Interesting. WSJ contact about bump-fire stocks.

I just received an email purportedly from the Wall Street Journal’s James V. Grimaldi. It appears to be mailing list, not really to me specifically; it isn’t as if the WSJ knows me from Adam.

But the topic is the ATF’s Notice of Proposed Rule-Making on “Bump-Stock Type Devices.” It wants me to take a survey and verify contact information for possible interview.

Being the suspicious type, I did check email headers for routing, and a few other things. It appears to be legit.

The survey specifically quotes a comment I submitted; it seems they’re going through all 193,000 comments and trying to contact folks.

And…

Yep. I just got another email on a different account. Because I also submitted a comment on behalf of The Zelman Partisans.

Anyone else getting these emailed survey requests?

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Just Do It

“9X% want…”

Put up. Or shut up.

I keep hearing this. I’ve been hearing it for years, in varying percentages, but always something considerably more than a mere super-majority.

But if you question why, if 95% of freaking everyone wants PPYI/AWB/waiting periods/free bubble-up/rainbow stew, the legislators won’t grant that wish, you’ll invariably hear that the NRA somehow owns everyone (despite the fact that Michael Bloomberg alone pours more money into campaigns that the entire NRA/ILA) and are stopping commonsense tyranny.

Or ask why, when universal universal background checks actually go to a vote of the people directly via referendum, the vote has never — even in left-wing Washington — gotten within 30 percentage points of the claimed ninety-whatever-they-claim-today. And that’s when it passes at all.They mutter something about the NRA buying the vote… of ALL THE INDIVIDUAL VOTERS?

Where’s my pile of money? Someone’s remiss in payment.

These are alleged adults, but the “NRA” is a bigger boogeyman to them than childhood’s monster-under-the-bed and the thing-in-the-closet combined.

[And manages to miss the little facts that the NRA backed: NFA’34, GCA’68, FOPA’86, Brady Bill PPYI, “assault weapon” bans, no-due process ERPOs, and bump-fire stock bans. And blocked constitutional carry. A gun control ally like that scares them?]

So here’s another question for them. A recent proposal was made to implement a total ban on firearms of any type, by anyone, via zoning laws.

Yeah, pretty silly, except for being completely unconstitutional and in direct contravention of judicial precedent on the very subject of 2A infringements through zoning laws.

Even in California.

I digress. Here’s the question:

If all you hundreds of millions (95% of 327 million is 310.65 million) of folks want to be gun-free, why not form your own privately owned and operated communities, in which everyone clearly wants to be gun-free?

TL;DR: If so many of you want to be totally gun-free, why do you need laws, and what are you waiting for? Just Do It.

95% want universal background checks? Just stroll down to your neighborhood gun store and pay him to run it. You’ll probably pay a surcharge as well, for the firearm handling fee since the gun will go in his bound book.

95% want some class of guns banned? Just turn yours in to the local cop shop. Better call ahead. You don’t need to wait for everyone else.

95% want gun registration? Just fill out this form and mail it to the ATF for their convenience. (And that will make a nice metric to show that 95% really wanted it, when the ATF receives 310 million letters all at once. Right?)

95% want bump-fire stocks banned? Under the coming rule, those will be NFA items, so mail them to the ATF, too. (And another nice metric; the ATF should receive roughly 475,000 stocks.)

I’m sure Chicago South Side zip codes will be well represented in those voluntary mailings.

Just do it. No one is stopping you.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Kirby, TX PD: Machinegun deception a matter of intent?

On Sunday, a person doing yard work discovered a pistol in the grass. In itself, that’s hardly news, as criminals do toss weapons after a crime, and this was stolen. But in this case, the “news” is in the police claims about the firearm.

After people find weapon in tall grass, Kirby police advise on what do if you find gun
Lt. James Laymon, of the Kirby Police Department, said the gun could have easily been fired. It was completely unsafe.

“This weapon was found with a round in the chamber and three rounds in the magazine, so it would have discharged if the trigger would have been pulled,” he said. “It was self-cycling, so it would have continued to do so three more times.

So Lt. Laymon is claiming this weapon is an illegal machinegun? Only a machinegun continues to cycle and discharge multiple times from a single operation of the trigger.

Not, “It would have discharged, and could be fired three more times.” It would have fired and continue to fire. Outside of military duty, relatively few people have fired an automatic weapon. Like myself, I think most people, upon hearing that a pistol had a round chambered and more in the magazine, would assume just another semiautomatic pistol. Specifying “continued to do so three more times” definitely sounds like an automatic weapon- a machinegun under the law. Prior to this, I have only seen “fire and continue to fire” descriptions used when the intent was to describe an automatic weapon. If Laymon inadvertently missppeaks so badly, I wonder if he should be speaking to the media in the first place.

Or testifying under oath in trials.

That appears to be a Springfield XD-S. That is not manufactured as an automatic weapon. One trigger operation, one shot. If it continues to discharge multiple times — “three more times” — after a single trigger pull, it is an unlawful machinegun.

I wonder…

  • Did Lt. Laymon simply make a remarkably odd error?
  • Is the lieutenant that ignorant of firearm operation?
  • Or was he deliberately fearmongering?

For that matter, is Lt. Laymon in the habit of involuntarily/negligently firing until magazine is empty, and assumes everyone else’s gun handling/safety is just as bad? Well… the FBI, I suppose. And I once worked with an officer who would pick up her shotgun with her finger on the trigger (prompting me to dive behind a truck, as she had it pointed at me); and to be honest, she did empty a revolver cylinder into a classroom building 180 degrees from the target she was supposed to be shooting. But they took her off duties with access to guns.

I asked. Kirby PD Chief Bois… answered replied.

The weapon in question was a semi-automatic handgun, not a machine gun. It was found with a round in the chamber and three more rounds in the magazine. This particular model of handgun does not have a thumb safety and if a child (or anyone for that matter) had found it and pull the trigger it would have gone off. Because it is semi-automatic it would have cycled another round into the chamber and required the trigger to be pulled again. We apologize for the confusion and hope this clears it up.

Note that he evades the question of why Laymon claimed — at a minimum — strongly implied to an unquestioning Patty Santos — that the pistol would have continued to cycle “three more times” after the trigger was pulled; i.e.- a machinegun under 26 U.S. Code § 5845(b). I clarified that.

Chief Bois,

_I_ am quite well aware that the Springfield XD-S is a semiautomatic firearm. It was _your_ lieutenant who asserted, to an unquestioning reporter, that the pistol would have cycled 4 times if the trigger had been pulled (which would make it a machinegun under 26 U.S. Code § 5845(b)). I am attempting to ascertain _why_ the lieutenant made that claim to the media.

The Chief said, “I believe that is clear the Lieutenant made a mistake in his choice of words during the interview.”

That’s some “mistake.”

And then, there is the matter of unquestioning reporter Patty Santos. Upon hearing a police lieutenant claim that a stolen and abandoned firearm would, when the trigger was pulled, fire and continue to fire until the magazine is empty, she should have demanded answers to more questions.

  • That is a machinegun?
  • How do you know, since it was just found?
  • Is it a registered NFA firearm? (I’ll cut her enough slack to allow that she might not realize the XD series went into production long after passage of FOPA.)
  • Where is the ATF, since they have jurisdiction over NFA items?

That first question would have exposed the simple fact that it was just another semi-auto, assuming honesty and knowledge on Laymon’s part.

Santos failed to do her job as badly as did Laymon.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Witkin Is Zoned Out

This little piece of witlessness made the rounds last week:

Can zoning laws settle the gun debate?
If there could be a “right” to be free of guns, the logical question is then how it should be asserted. The answer may be in zoning. Because gun rights are tied to personal security, there appears to be room for citizens to exclude guns in their immediate surroundings as one means of protecting themselves.

No.

The is no “right” to be free of guns owned by other people. Your rights do not extend to denying other people’s rights. One can choose to be free of guns by not owning one. One cannot choose to make anyone else not own a gun. You do not have a right to my property.

Because gun rights were tied to personal security, there appears to be room for citizens to exclude guns in their immediate surroundings as one means of protecting themselves.

Witkin cites Heller, and claims that a decision, which specifically ruled against firearms restrictions so onerous as to prevent possession, somehow supports… zoning laws that prevent possession.

For example, zoning at the neighborhood or even block level could allow people to assert a right to be free from guns. Zoning is a policy tool that courts have upheld even when it clashes with the constitutional rights of individuals, such as freedom of expression and the sale of guWill he volunteer to lead the stack in confiscation raids?ns.

And there he cites Teixeira to demonstrate that zoning laws can restrict Second Amendment rights. Wrongly:

The district court’s characterization of residentially-zoned districts” as “sensitive areas” is incongruous with Heller, which assumed that firearms could be restricted in sensitive places “such as schools and government buildings,” specifically in contrast to residences, where firearms could not be prohibited.

It seems unlikely that Witlesskin actually read Teixeira, any more than he read Heller. Teixeira did not uphold the restriction of 2A rights through zoning; it found that zoning which excluded a proposed gun store did not infringe upon a recognized right because there were other stores in the area where firearms could be purchased, and people could still possess firearms. That is the opposite of Witkin’s claim.

I repeat: Heller (and later McDonald) specifically ruled against firearms restrictions so onerous as to prevent possession.

No, you cannot zone away our rights.

Federal courts are pretty consistent in recognizing that one can’t simply wave away constitutional rights. Take a look at Winbigler v. Warren County Housing Authority, in which the plaintiff challenged a public housing lease provision banning firearms possession outright.

The Court hereby permanently enjoins and restrains Defendant WCHA from enforcing the following lease provisions:

5(h): The Resident, the Residents household members and household guests shall not: discharge or use firearms or fireworks, or store explosive or flammatory materials.

18(p): Any termination of this Lease shall be carried out in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations, State and local law, and the terms of this Lease. The Landlord shall not terminate or refuse to renew the Lease other than for serious or repeated violation of material terms of the Lease on the part of the Resident, all members of the Resident’s household and all visitors/guests of the Resident such as the following: Offensive weapons or illegal drugs seized in the Landlord’s unit by a law enforcement officer or to permit any member of the household, a guest, or another person under the Resident’s control to use, possess or have control over firearms (this includes keeping firearms on one’s body, in the dwelling unit, or in a vehicle which the Resident or a member of the Resident’s household as the use of or access to. Firearms are defined as any devices which will propel a projectile with sufficient force to injure, kill, or damage property regardless of whether it does so with an explosive charge, compressed gas, or by other means).

Georgetown University should be ashamed of publishing that ignorant drivel, and more so of the rights-violation advocacy.

You can’t do it. Not by zoning, not by lease, not by HOA restrictions. But ill-informed people like Witkin will keep trying, so let’s move on to the practical problem of enforcement, which he glosses over.

Ideally, enforcement of gun-free zoning laws should be generally light, such as civil forfeiture or forced sale of the firearm, but harsher on violent criminals who possess guns.

Compliance. He, as typically happens, left out the “How”.

Specifically, how Witkin would ensure everyone complied with his gun-free neighborhood laws. How will he locate and seize Grandma’s bedside table revolver? Door to door searches? With a warrant based upon, “Gee, judge; we just need to see if anyone might be breaking our law”? Perhaps he can pass a warrant-free zone law as well.

I wonder if he’s considered the implications of kicking in doors because he thinks the residents are well armed. When California legislators first considered their “assault weapon” ban, the head of the police union declared they’d see the largest outbreak of “blue flu” in history if they had to do door to door searches. Legislators immediately modified their bill.

Does Witkin believe everyone (law-abiding and criminal alike) will meekly turn stuff in? California got a 2.33% compliance rate with just registration. Connecticut thinks they might have gotten 13.44% compliance with their “assault weapon” registration scheme.

How will Witkin bell that cat?

Will he volunteer to lead the stack in confiscation raids?


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)


Ed. note: This commentary appeared first in TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

War on Law and Order: Western Society under Siege Part II

ABBREVIATIONS AND VOCABULARY1

BLM: Black Lives Matter NBP: New Black Panthers

RGI: Racial Grievance Industry SPLC: Southern Poverty Law Center

Before a drop of water fell from the skies, two outcomes were predictable with respect to recent hurricanes (Texas and Puerto Rico); looters would issue forth from the muck they inhabit and Leftists would grandstand commonplace weather events claiming manmade global warming as their cause. Now racism has been added to the mix. White journalist and author Sarah Jaffe declared on social media the Miami Police Department’s warning against looting demonstrates that; “The carceral (sic) [Spanish for jail or prison] state…is inseparable from white supremacy.”2 Aren’t assumptions by liberals that looters are black racist? In any criminal investigation police ask who had a motive, how would they profit? Ever wonder why shrill proponents of man-made global warming typically are socialists and enemies of the 2nd Amendment? Don’t see the connection? You should, they’re pounding this stuff into your kid’s heads at school. How would Leftists profit from American’s acceptance of manmade global warming? They say big problems require big government solutions but it’s really about surrendering individual liberty to the State and that mean’s them. Doesn’t anyone read anymore?3 The predictability of post-disaster looting these days is a sad commentary on societal degradation…like school shootings. After any major disaster, natural or manmade, can police protect people or are they on their own?4 Well, how are they doing now in the face of increasingly organized violence and riots? The Liberal Media, called “steno-pool typists for the Democrat Party” by radio talk show host Chris Plante, push narratives of police brutality against blacks causing inner-city “unrest” but are these narratives valid? In part one I began addressing whether or not it’s true the police, as charged, target black males for oppression and murder on behalf of the white race. This claim, dropped like napalm over inner-cities by the Left, ensures any encounter between police and blacks has the potential to explode into general violence and chaos.

Many in the Black community blame problems between races on the refusal of whites to even talk about race relations. Obama’s former Attorney General and international gun-runner Eric Holder (known in some circles as “Carlos the Jackass”) said America was a “nation of cowards” when it came to discussing race relations. Whites won’t discuss it. In addition, he claimed animus directed toward him and Obama was based on white racism.5 As a teacher, under a cloud of suspicion for being a, (cover your children’s ears) conservative, I was asked my opinion of Obama by students and colleagues. According to Holder, honesty and openness is the best way to promote race relations. Had I explained Obama, raised a communist, was waging a war against the principles contained in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, was deconstructing America’s Judeo-Christian foundations, hated the traditional family, and was dismantling economic policies that made America wealthy, wouldn’t my honesty have been a step toward “openness”? No, instead I’d have been branded a racist.6 For Holder and Leftists, the only acceptable starting point for discussions of race, crime, and the police is their perspective otherwise you’re automatically deemed a racist. Recall Obama’s claim lethal interactions between the police and black males stemmed from racism on the part of white officers? Was he right? Are police really the gravest threat to black males in America?

Consider the work of liberal University of Chicago and Yale professors Steven Levitt and John Donahue, respectively, whose national best seller, Freakonomics claims aborting black babies reduces crime. They argue unwanted and children born to single moms are typically black and more likely to grow up to become criminals. They conclude the 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion, (Roe v. Wade) is responsible for reducing crime in the 1990s because aborted black babies weren’t around to turn 18 in 1991 and commit crimes.7 M.I.T. professor Jonathan Grueber, Liberal mover and shaver behind Obama’s socialized national healthcare, reached the same conclusion.8 Levitt, Donahue, Grueber, and others within the population control movement, Leftists all, argue America can save itself a lot of trouble and money by ensuring black babies are never born. Liberals are the ones fanatically pushing abortion which typically takes the life of unborn black babies at a rate four times that of white babies. Nine hundred black babies are aborted every day in the U.S which comes out to 328,500 per year. Considering black women make up around 7% of the U.S. population, and have 35.6% of all abortions,9 one has to wonder why its angry bitter middle-aged liberal white women pushing abortion so hysterically. The ghosts of Sudan and Rwanda cry out. And then there is the inner-city homicide rate. By 26 July 2017, Baltimore, my old stomping ground,10 had reached 200 homicides11 with 27 in a 30 day period between 11 August and 11 September, 2017.12 They weren’t shot, stabbed, or bludgeoned to death by the police. So who then is waging war against blacks? BLM insists its cops acting as executioners on behalf of the white race.

According to Black journalist and author Taleeb Starkes, perhaps as detrimental to race relations as white indifference, if not worse, is the “Racial Grievance Industry.” This “industry,” consisting of BLM, NBP, SPLC, certain black politicians, and white dominated Left-wing organizations blame everything from black on black violence, poor education, and unemployment on white racism. Starkes asks; how can this can be true considering municipal governments, schools, police, and social programs in Baltimore, Detroit, Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., and other cities have been controlled not by whites but by black Democrats for decades? But BLM-RGI dismiss this fact claiming all problems afflicting the black community are the legacy and consequence of white racism. Starkes calls this the “Theory of Exploitivity”; any conflict between races is, always was, and always will be the result of white racism. Leftist mouthpieces for BLM-RGI; white college professors and the liberal media, assert “Racism is the end-all-be-all explanation” for problems in the black community therefore “no fact finding mission is necessary.” Any effort, study, and or investigation of problems within the black community whose starting point does not begin with the presumption of white racism as the root cause, is racist. End of discussion.13 For example, economist Thomas Sowell is black but his observation of a correlation between fatherless homes and Baltimore rioters and looters is considered racist if uttered by a white person14 and treasonous heresy if uttered by members of the black community.15 This echoes my experiences with liberals coast to coast; the only reason anyone could disagree with them is because they’re narrow-minded, racist, a Nazi, and stupid. Before dialogue on race relations is possible, promoters of the “Theory of Exploitivity” demand whites accept that they are inherently racist from birth and the cause of all problems between the races, then we’ll talk.16 In tandem with the RGI, white Liberals promote the notion simply being born a minority, race, sex, culture, or religion automatically renders one a victim of discrimination and racism by the dominant group, white males. Critical analysis of this presumption is taboo especially on college campuses where students enjoy an environment supportive of the free exchange of ideas.17 When debate on racial issues must begin with a stipulation of white guilt as the singular cause for all problems, is it any wonder BLM shrieks with outrage when others say; “all lives matter?”

Today, suburban middle class whites are told their comfortable gold-plated golf and tennis country-club lives are the result of slavery, exploitation, and colonial oppression of black and brown peoples. Indoctrination begins in grade school where little white children are taught they’re members of a privileged class who ensure their status atop the social and political hierarchy by denying participation in the good-life to all but members of their own race. This explains why whites want to build the “wall.” Playing on guilt instilled through brainwashing, this Marxist world-view is heavily promoted by Hollywood, by comedians, professional athletes, pop-singers, and reinforced by the Liberal Media and their handmaidens, Leftwing public school teachers. It takes little effort by college professors to administer the coup-de-grace teaching because white prosperity is built on racist exploitation, blacks are justified in rioting and looting. They are simply re-appropriating what was stolen from them in the first place. In addition, they teach, because whites control all institutions of political power, any problem in non-white communities must be the fault of whites.18 Your tax dollars at work.

Do not mistake BLM for a traditional civil rights organization. They’re not. They clash often with the old guard of the civil rights movement rejecting the non-violence of Dr. Martin Luther King in favor of belligerent confrontation and mob violence. Yusra Khogali, co-founder of the Toronto, Canada, BLM chapter declared the movement rejects the goals and tactics of the “old-guard” who led the civil rights movement in the 1960s. They reject equality, integration, and assimilation into mainstream American culture and life. Instead, they want revenge obtained through violence. Even Left-wing black “leaders” from Al Sharpton to Oprah Winfrey are denounced for not embracing violent revolution and vengeance against the white race.19 As for young (big surprise) whites seen marching with BLM, regardless of how much they sacrifice to the cause, they’re still considered racists by BLM and similar organizations. Being Caucasian means sharing collective guilt for any act of racism ever committed by any white person who ever lived, at any time in history. Therefore Caucasians are irredeemably racist.

Read BLM’s words for yourselves: “We are working to (re)build the Black Liberation movement.”20 Liberation from what? During the 1960s, the “Black Power” movement and members of various “Black Liberation” organizations, led by Max Stanford, Stokely Carmichael, Jim Forman, Malcolm X, H. Rap Brown, Willie Ricks, Eldridge Cleaver, Huey Newton, Bobby Seale, and others broke away from Martin Luther King calling for violent confrontation and revolution against white power structures and rejected King’s notions of “universal brotherhood.” Living in Northwest Philly at the time, how could I forget their pernicious influence? Like BLM, they were black segregationists demanding nothing short of war, violence, revenge, and ultimate separation from the white race.21 In their minds because all aspects of American life; family, education, culture, law enforcement, and government comprise institutionalized racism, revolution and separation is the only answer to liberate and free the black race. The success, direction, and fate of black people must be wrested from the control of white hands.22 The goals of the Black Liberation movement, embraced by BLM and allies, are exclusive. Whites making common cause will be accepted, used, and discarded. No place exists for the white man in their brave new world.

BLM makes no bones about being at war with the white race. They declare their movement is an “ideological and political intervention in a world where Black lives are systematically targeted for demise.”23 Remarkably they are in a sense, correct. Black males are being targeted for extermination but, by other black males not the police or members of the white race! They claim Trayvon Martin’s “murder” (sic) by George Zimmerman was the catalyst for creation of BLM. Martin’s case was an example of police and white vigilantes on patrol looking for blacks to “murder.” BLM also attacks “black nationalism” and campaigns to “buy black” because it ignores “our sisters, queer and trans” blacks. They affirm “the lives of black queer and trans folks, disabled folks, black-undocumented folks” black felons and convicts, and blacks all “along the gender spectrum.”24 Their worldview, seen through a Marxist-Lesbian lens, claim poverty in the black community is the consequence of genocide executed through a government controlled by whites. Blacks are in prison not because they’ve committed violent crimes you see, but are innocent victims rounded up by the state for internment in concentration camps. They assert “Black queer and trans folk bear a unique burden from a hetero-patriarchal society that disposes of us like garbage and simultaneously fetishizes us and profits off of us, and this is state violence.” Does this sound like people organized simply to ensure fair treatment from the police or does a much larger agenda emerge? Their societal model is a female-led communal village, rejection of the traditional Western family (pre-1980s..ish), and their slogan is “justice, liberation, and peace” identical to the slogan of Soviet inspired Communist guerrilla movements of Africa, Asia, Southeast Asia, and Latin America in the last century. They promise to dismantle “cis-gender privilege” and free black society from the grip of heterosexuality.25 This is about Trayvon Martin?

Its clear reading BLM, NBP, and SPLC propaganda these movements aren’t about improving race relations or diffusing mistrust between blacks and the police. It’s about revolution. Communist revolution, baby. They want conflict, they want confrontation, and they want violent upheaval. Alleged white racism and police brutality are boogeyman myths effective in harnessing support in the black community, forming alliances with radical communist groups like Pantifa,26 guilt ridden whites, and neutering opposition by menacing them with being damned a racist. Bitter fruit has already been harvested in the ambush and assassination of police officers by suspects high on BLM propaganda and hatred. But what of all the stories about cops shooting unarmed innocent blacks? Stay tuned.

11 To streamline the discussion and avoid ponderous repetition, please refer to these abbreviations.

22 Fox News, “Prestigious author compares arrests of looters to ‘white supremacy,’ 2017/09/11, at https://www.foxnews.com/prestigiousauthor. Jaffe is a Nation Institute [“think” tank sponsored by the far Leftist magazine The Nation] fellow, and writes on labor, “economic justice,” social movements, “gender” and other causes on the far Left. She writes for The Nation. The correct spelling is carcel.

33 For scoffers, doubters, and the “Well you know Larry,” types, have you read: Environmental Overkill by Dixy Lee Ray and Lou Guzzo, Trashing the Planet by the same authors, The Satanic Gases by Patrick J. Michaels and Robert C. Balling, Jr., The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science by Tom Bethell, and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism by Christopher C. Horner? If not, get them, read them, free yourself from the lazy man’s brainwashing; pop culture. My acquaintance wouldn’t listen to me. After all, everyone says…

44 Hurricane Katrina and George Bush’s role in causing it came up during a SocialIST studies department in-service at Lee’s Summit High School. A liberal colleague from another but “attached” to the SocialIST studies department, who I knew well, admonished me not to use the term “looter” because it was de facto racist. How so, I asked. He said it conjured images of black people looting. I responded, “You’re the one associating race with looting. I never mentioned race.” For the Left, truth does not matter.

66 I replied that Obama seemed like an intelligent, passionate, honest, and very likeable guy. I made no references to his politics nor did I ever criticize him. Ever. Massive prohibition on free speech for conservatives in public education forbade otherwise.

77 “Did Steven Levitt, author of Freakonomics Get His Notorious Paper Wrong?” At http://www.bos.frb.org/economic/wp/wp2005/wp0515.pdf.

88 Mona Charen, “Abortion-Distortion-and-Crime,” National Review (January 2, 2015) at http://www.nationalreview.com/article/395585/abortion-distortion-and-crime.htm.

99 Abortion and Race at http://www.righttolifeofmichigan.org Most of those abortions occur among teen and pre-teen cohorts in the black community so it’s much worse; roughly 2% of black Americans having over 35% of all abortions.

1010 I attended Margaret Brent School #53, 100 East 26th Street, Baltimore, Maryland, 21218.

1111 Carrie Wells, “Baltimore Reaches 200 Homicide Mark for 2017,” The Baltimore Sun, at http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-ci-200-homicides-20170726-story-htm.

1212 “Baltimore Homicides: 27 homicides in the last 30 days,” Baltimore Sun, at http://www.baltimoresun.com/data.baltimoresun.com. The number had reached 242 by 5 September, 2017.

1313 Taleeb Starkes, Black Lies Matter: Why Lies Matter to the Racial Grievance Industry (Lexington, Kentucky, Createspace Independent Publishing Platform, 2016), 1-3.

1414 As part of the campaign to force me into retirement, because I “liked” a FB YouTube video of Professor Thomas Sowell making this statement, I was written up and accused of being racist. I was told my “like” was totally inappropriate and, because students could see it, I was in violation of a rather broad and vague (Union’s opinion) district policy. I had been on FB all of 3 weeks and was totally unfamiliar with how it worked. At issue was not the validity of Sowell’s observation. To paraphrase Tina Turner, With Liberals, what’s truth got to do with it, got to do with it? As an aside, the very white administrator who wrote me up never lived in Baltimore or Philadelphia’s inner city. I did…

1515 Thomas Sowell, “The Inconvenient Truth About Ghetto Communities’ Social Breakdown,” National Review, at http://nationalreveiew.com/articles/4178991/inconvenient-truth-about-ghetto-communities-social-breakdown-thomas-sowell.htm., May 15, 2015.

1616 Starkes, 3.

1717 Ann Coulter, Guilty: Liberal “Victims” And Their Assault On America (New York, N.Y., Crown Forum, a Division of Random House, 2008), 1-2, 8-9, 13.

1818 Perry Chiaramonte, “Black Lives’ leader defends looting in Yale lecture, 8 October, 2015, FOX NEWS, at; https://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/10/08/black-lives-leader-defends-looting-in-yale-lecture.html. See also: Dan McLaughlin, “The Ferguson Riots Are Nothing Like The Original Tea Party Protests,” The Federalist, at http://thefederalist.com/2014/08/the-ferguson-riots-are-nothing-like-the-original-tea-party-protests/. And: Jamaal Abdul-Alim, “Sociology Professor: Milwaukee Riots Not a Surprise,” Diverse Issues In Higher Education, at http://diverseducation.com/article/86025/.

1919 Starkes, 30-34.

2121 Daniel J. Boorstin and Brooks Mather Kelley, A History of the United States since 1861 (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, Inc., 1990), 437-439. I grew up in the inner cities of Baltimore and Philadelphia during the 1960s and witnessed the Black Power movement and its consequences first hand.

2222 David Horowitz, Hating Whitey And Other Progressive Causes (Dallas, Texas, Spence Publishing Company, 1999), 82-83.

2323 Black Lives Matter web page.

2424 IBID. Its “sex,” not “gender” and there are only two; male and female. How far has mankind fallen that it is necessary to have to explain this?

2525 IBID.

CIS-Gender refers to people who insist in identifying their sex with their anatomy. For example, a girl looks down, see’s “girl parts,” and concludes she’s a, well, girl…imagine that. Even in my former high school, kids were being pressured in using these terms, crafted by homosexuals, lesbians, and transvestites, to remove deserved stigma and opprobrium and transfer it instead to heterosexuals, God’s design for mankind. Black Liberation refers to armed struggle and revolution promoted by the former Black Panthers. They issued a call for black people to take up arms against white people to win liberation.

2626 Antifa is the self-styled name of a radial collection of anarchists and communists, which began in Europe, opposing fascism by being fascists themselves. They are dedicated to overthrowing all vestiges of Judeo-Christian based Western Society and its philosophy of freedom. Violent and extreme, they wear panties over their faces to hide their identities hence the name Pantifa.

Thanks to my brother Mike for suggesting this topic, providing sources, and help for this article. We are both survivors of Baltimore’s inner-city as well as Philadelphia.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Rights through the eyes of a victim disarmer

Jamie Lee Curtis, notable anti-human/civil rights advocate, has peculiar ideas about how rights work.

“I am vocal about common-sense gun safety and gun laws,” she says. “For instance, I fully support an assault weapon ban, I fully support a bump stock ban.”

That doesn’t make her anti-gun, she clarifies. “I fully support the Bill of Rights. And fully support the Second Amendment. And have absolutely no problem with people owning firearms if they have been trained, licensed, a background check has been conducted, a pause button has been pushed to give time for that process to take place. And they have to renew their license just like we do with automobiles – which are weapons also.”

What is it with victim disarmers and cars? Let’s try that on other rights.

Voting: I am vocal about common-sense voting laws,” she says. “For instance, I fully support a straight party ticket ban, I fully support a independent voting ban.”

That doesn’t make her anti-voting, she clarifies. “I fully support the Bill of Rights. And fully support the First Amendment. And have absolutely no problem with people voting if they have been trained, licensed, a background check has been conducted, a pause button has been pushed to give time for that process to take place. And they have to renew their license just like we do with automobiles.

Searches: I am vocal about warrantless searches,” she says. “For instance, I fully support a stop & frisk, I fully support a no-knock warrantless drug raids.”

That doesn’t make her anti-privacy, she clarifies. “I fully support the Bill of Rights. And fully support the Fourth Amendment. And have absolutely no problem with people being searched if they have been trained, licensed, a background check has been conducted, a pause button has been pushed to give time for that process to take place. And they have to renew their license just like we do with automobiles.

Speech: I am vocal about common-sense speech laws,” she says. “For instance, I fully support a ban on public rallies, I fully support government censorship.”

That doesn’t make her anti-free speech, she clarifies. “I fully support the Bill of Rights. And fully support the First Amendment. And have absolutely no problem with people speaking up if they have been trained in acceptable opinions, licensed, a background check has been conducted, a pause button has been pushed to give time for that process to take place. And they have to renew their license just like we do with automobiles.

Gay Rights: I am vocal about common-sense marriage laws,” she says. “For instance, I fully support a ban on same-sex marriage, I fully support a sodomy ban”

That doesn’t make her anti-gay, she clarifies. “I fully support the Bill of Rights. And have absolutely no problem with straight people marrying if they have been trained, licensed, a background check has been conducted, a pause button has been pushed to give time for that process to take place. And they have to renew their license just like we do with automobiles.

STFU, Curtis.

And I wonder… Curtis claims to be an alcoholic and past drug abuser. What is she doing handling firearms at all? Were those blank-only props?


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Jews. Guns. No compromise. No surrender.

Password Reset
Please enter your e-mail address. You will receive a new password via e-mail.